"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Chip Jones" wrote in message
[snippd]


I asked for quotes. I know how to get the bill. But you're the one who's
saying it privitizes ATC. Show me where it says that.

I looked at the quotes Mark provided. All I see is language that
*prohibits* the privitization of ATC, but which makes clear that the
*existing* contract tower program is still legal.

Since you are so sure of yourself, perhaps you could explain what language
is found elsewhere in the bill that overrides the language presented so
far.


Here is a synopisis.




119. PROHIBITION ON AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL PRIVATIZATION

House bill

Prohibits DOT from privatizing the functions performed by its air traffic
controllers who separate and control aircraft. States that this prohibition
does not apply to the functions performed at air traffic control towers that
are operated by private entities under the FAA's contract tower program.
This exemption covers the current air traffic control towers that are part
of the FAA contract tower program and to non-towered airports and
non-federal towers that would qualify for participation in this program.

Senate amendment

Prohibits DOT from privatizing the functions performed by its air traffic
controllers who separate and control aircraft and the functions of those who
maintain and certify those systems. Section shall not apply to an FAA tower
operated under the contract tower program as of the date of enactment.

Conference substitute

Prohibits DOT from privatizing air traffic control functions associated with
the separation and control of aircraft, but ensures that the current
contract tower program can continue and be expanded to new towers and VFR
towers. The prohibition sunsets after 4 years.


You can verify the accuracy of this synopsis by researching the House Bill,
the Senate version of the language, and then the Conference substitute that
will soon become law if NATCA loses her fight in the next few days. Or you
can believe AOPA.

Chip, ZTL